Well yes, it's not a pure platformer in the strictest sense. It's an adventure game with platforming elements. The game was meant to be the natural successor to the 8-bit/16-bit Super Mario Bros. titles and with the advent of 3D Nintendo went with an open world structure. The rest is history.
You can't really compare the two styles, but I will say that the freedom of Super Mario 64 on top of the platforming makes it more fun than the Galaxy games. You get more bang for your buck and it's more enjoyable, in my opinion. It feels more grand and you can go in any direction much like what Aonuma highlighted as the starting point for Zelda U (which excites me, by the way). I prefer how you can explore areas not in view in Super Mario 64 whereas you can more or less see everywhere you can go to in the Galaxy series. That adds intrigue and a sense of adventure that I don't think Super Mario Galaxy or any other Mario game since has quite matched.
I don't think we should really be regressing into a debate about which style is better as they're separate entities. I tend to prefer what Super Mario 64 achieved, but I'm not going to make any prescriptivist assertions like 'platformers SHOULD be about non-linear open-world exploration'.
Genres merge all the time, it's what gives us variety.
Log in to comment